Jharkhand High Court
Indra Kotwal @ Inder Kotwal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 17 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 73 of 2023
With
I.A. No.1384 of 2023
Indra Kotwal @ Inder Kotwal ........... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .......Respondent.
-------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. S.P. Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.
----------------------------
03/Dated: 17th March, 2023
The instant appeal has been admitted and the Lower Court Records
was called for, as would appear from the order dated 13th January, 2023.
We have perused the Lower Court Records.
The prayer by the instant interlocutory application has been made for
suspension of sentence till disposal of the present criminal appeal and to grant
bail to the appellant in connection with S.T. Case No.17 of 2021 arising out of
Mahgama P.S. Case No.190 of 2020 during pendency of the present criminal
appeal which has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 17 th
November, 2022 and order of sentence dated 22nd November, 2022 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Godda, whereby the appellant has been convicted
for the offence under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years along with fine of Rs.10,000/- for
the said offence.
Mr. S.P. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has
submitted by referring to the finding recorded by the learned trial court in the
impugned judgment, more particularly the discussion of testimony of P.W.-4,
namely, Talamai Hansda as has been made in paragraph 10 thereof, wherein she
has stated that she had seen the commission of crime of assault being given by
the appellant upon her deceased husband. It has been deposed by her that her
husband after sustaining the injury on his head by lathi has fell down and
immediately thereafter she went at the place of occurrence along with her sons,
namely, Stephin Marandi and Surja Pahariya. Thereafter her deceased husband
was carried to the hospital and he after having discharged from the hospital has
come to his residence but again he had been carried to the hospital due to the
deteriorating health condition. It has been submitted that there is wide
contradiction in the testimony of P.W.-4 since at one place she has stated that
wine shop (the place of occurrence) is just adjacent to the house, where her
husband went and had seen the occurrence while spreading clothes at her house
and at that time the appellant has assaulted her husband by lathi on his head
due to which her husband fell down but she has also given contradictory
statement that the appellant went at his house and came with a lathi and
assaulted him and as such her testimony cannot be said to be trustworthy.
It has further been submitted that the P.W.-4 deposed in his testimony about
the multiple assault being given upon her husband but the same is not being
corroborated from the medical testimony as would appear from the testimony of
P.W.-7 (Dr. Agnesh Kumar Sinha) who has found only one ante mortem injury.
The doctor has also found that the stomach of the deceased was having
alcoholic smell and in that view of the matter it is a case where the
preponderance of probability is attracting and, therefore, it is a fit case for
suspension of sentence.
This Court after taking into consideration, the aforesaid submission is,
hereby, calling upon the State to file objection, if any, as to why the sentence
passed in connection with S.T. Case No.17 of 2021 arising out of Mahgama P.S.
Case No.190 of 2020 be not kept in abeyance.
The objection, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.
Accordingly, list this matter on 28th April, 2023.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Rohit Pandey/-
